Comment on Misleading Metrics: A New List on This Blog by RMS
Thanks for the reply, Jeffrey. I didn’t realize this was not the actual page of the list.
View ArticleComment on Misleading Metrics by Alex SL
This is a good addition to the site but I am wondering about criteria 2, 3 and 5 because they also apply to Thompson Reuters. And yes, correct me if I am wrong, but that appears to include criterion 3....
View ArticleComment on Misleading Metrics: A New List on This Blog by Jeremy
Hindawi is a fake bogus publishing house. Can you please include it in your list, sir?
View ArticleComment on Misleading Metrics: A New List on This Blog by Jeffrey Beall
I disagree. Hindawi is NOT on my list.
View ArticleComment on Misleading Metrics: A New List on This Blog by Xion yuen
I object to your statement that: “The journal does not have an authentic impact factor assigned by Thomson Reuters.” All companies are bogus, including Thomson Reuters. You are continuously doing the...
View ArticleComment on Greedy Indian Publisher Charges Authors and Readers, Requires...
What is wrong if they are charging a small amount for publication of the paper?
View ArticleComment on Greedy Indian Publisher Charges Authors and Readers, Requires...
If you want to pay to submit a paper to a publisher that only makes its articles available through subscriptions, that lies by saying all universities have access, and that takes your copyright, go...
View ArticleComment on Misleading Metrics: A New List on This Blog by Jeffrey Beall
You missed the point. The journal was trying to mislead people to think that it had a real impact factor, that is, one assigned by Thomson Reuters. In fact, it does not. This conversation is not about...
View ArticleComment on David Publishing: Flipping Its Model by ‘History Research’:...
[…] quick Google search reveals lots of academics worrying about this publisher: see here (Scholarly Open Access’s watch list) and here (Brian Leiter’s philosophy […]
View ArticleComment on Beall’s List of Predatory Publishers 2013 by sumanth
Thank you for your time and the informative reply.
View ArticleComment on Misleading Metrics: A New List on This Blog by Jeffrey Beall
It looks very low quality. I have added it to my backlog. There are about ten new journals like this appearing from India each week, and unfortunately, I no longer have the time to analyze them all.
View ArticleComment on Misleading Metrics: A New List on This Blog by Bill White
Yes, misleading metrics, indeed, including the traditional impact factor itself! Again, see a recent paper about it here: http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs11948-014-9517-0 Why there should...
View ArticleComment on New Madras-Based Publisher is a Laugh a Minute by Mark
Oh, and let’s not forget their logo, which is royalty-free clip art: http://www.clipartof.com/portfolio/seamartini/illustration/blue-quill-pen-and-open-book-1146282.html
View ArticleComment on Criteria for Determining Predatory Open-Access Publishers (2nd...
[…] Criteria for Determining Predatory Open-Access Publishers […]
View ArticleComment on LIST OF PUBLISHERS by A Guide to Looking Smart on the Internet:...
[…] Beall’s List: Potential, possible, or probable predatory scholarly open-access publishers […]
View ArticleComment on Chinese Publisher MDPI Added to List of Questionable Publishers by...
Hmm, it seems about the time this came out, I was finishing up as a guest editor with the journal Entropy. I certainly tried to live up to the job and took a very active roll in the reviewing process...
View ArticleComment on Under Pressure, MDPI Tries to Clean House, Retracts Paper by Wayne...
Admittedly, a key word search would have shown MathSciNet, but that can be for more prosaic reasons that it was missed. The editor does acknowledge the presence of the 2005 information.
View ArticleComment on Misleading Metrics: A New List on This Blog by tekija
Today got a mail from http://www.peertechz.com/index Not on the list – as new ones are literally popping up quicker than one can evaluate them, a list of journals that have passed you scrutiny is...
View ArticleComment on Lambert Academic Publishing: A Must to Avoid by Nica
I perfectly agree with Dan. First of all, it can be agreed with that LAP is neither Oxford University Publishing, nor Harvard & Co. and we all know and we knew before signing the rights and...
View ArticleComment on Chinese Publisher MDPI Added to List of Questionable Publishers by...
I agree that the implications of the article are surely misleading. I can hardly think that sugar is benign. However, the graph itself might be informative in the sense that consumption has probably...
View Article